Identi.ca character limit results
Last week we started a poll to measure community will on the preferred character limit for identi.ca. We used a polling tool built into the Drupal system we use for this blog. We also used an ad hoc system, asking users to post on Identi.ca with tags like #limit140, #limit280, to indicate their preference.
The poll results were mixed. 140 (the current default) was by far the preferred character limit in both polls. It got a strong plurality: about 45% of the vote in both the Drupal poll and the "tag poll". The next strongest value was 280, with about 20% of the vote. However, in total, the votes for values >140 was about 55%; a strong signal for change.
What will be the next steps? It seems there's no clear mandate for a change from 140 characters to some other number. Sometime in the near future, we will do a "runoff" poll between 140 and the nearest competitor, 280. We're going to give that a little time to avoid "polling fatigue".
Until then, we've set up StatusNet Cloud community sites with each of the character limits listed in the poll. So, if you've really got a favorite, feel free to set up an account on one of these community sites:
- 140.status.net
- 280.status.net
- 300.status.net
- 420.status.net
- 500.status.net
- 1000.status.net
- unlimited.status.net
And if you'd like to have your own StatusNet Cloud single-user site, sign up with coupon code MYOWNLIMIT, and we'll get you straightened out right away.
Thanks to everyone who participated; it was an interesting conversation and one we hope to continue.
Comments
Twitter can't / won't evolve - and will die.
Twitter defined the 140 limit eons ago and continues to arrogantly tell everyone it's right because of text messaging. If you receive notices via your cell phone's text interface, look out, because you're about to be squashed by a wooly mammoth.
It's a matter of usage patterns.
When I first started microblogging, I often bumped against the 140 char limit, and wished I had 20 more to play with. And I still find myself unable to paste a nice, but slightly-too-long quotation from time to time. But overall the current limit has taught me to be concise and expressive. And I like being able to scan a stream quickly.
That said, I'm all for choice. It's good that the software supports arbitrary limits, and I wouldn't exactly mind if it was larger on the main identi.ca website. It *would* change my usage pattern though. Possibly in a dramatic manner.
OMB Interoperability Support For Diverse Character Limits
I've been trying out the 280, 300, and 500 sites. But until OpenMicroblogging supports auto-breaking notices into the appropriate size for the receiving system, it hard to experience what a real deployment would be like. Autobreaking would have to preserve @user on each piece, of course.
Why not implement this first, then re-announce these test sites and ask us to experiment.
So far, though, 280 or 300 seems about right. Even if most notices are in the sub-140 range, the occasional longer one gets through in a readable format, with fewer confusing abbreviations like IMHO or ISTM.
Also, talk to Google about adding OMB support to Buzz and Jaiku. That would be mega-awesome.
How do I limit characters
How do I limit characters where readers have entered both unicode and english characters ?
Depends on the language
Depends on the language actually.
English is pretty good for 140 caracters. But for french it is often "short".
160 like short messagge
160 like short messagge service better than 140 that very short, maybe have costum idiom to enter long word
Universal Internet Language
The character limit discussion became quite exciting for me after the language debate started. I think, there really is a need (long-term view!) for an universal Internet language.
P.S.: I wonder what's the character limit for a sms in countries with non-latin-based languages. 160 as well, I guess.
better poll
Evan,
Reading the posts it seems like non-English writers are for longer limit and English-only writers are for preserving 140.
To confirm this, and measure how strong is the feeling against 140, you can How strong is your desire to extend the char limit above 140?
1. No desire
2. Would be nice
3. Would definitely prefer
4. Can't wait when this happens
5. Without extention it is almost useless vor me
The second field should ask about what language they use.
My guts feeling is increasing 50% to 210 should make non-English writers happy. Is there a way to use different limit depending on English/not?
Thanks,
Igor.
ideal character limit
I think that 200 would be a good character limit.Well I have no scientific reasoning to second it with :) but just personal preference.
cap characters where readers have entered both unicode and eng
How do I limit characters where readers have entered both unicode and english characters ? Can someone please direct me to a link ?
Choice
Why have this choice at all? Just choose a limit and stick with it. All it brings is a lot of confusion and discussion about nothing. The people who don't agree will learn to live with it. Be a benevolent dictator.
Why have a poll at all?
Why have a poll at all? StatusNet should choose a limit they find best and stick with it. The whiners that scream for another limit will get used to it. Letting people choose will only bring confusion and lots of discussion about nothing. Be a benevolent dictator.
Choosing limits
Our software supports variable limits for notices. Speaking for myself and for the company, we don't have a stake in any particular limit for Identi.ca; we'll be supporting public and private sites on the StatusNet Cloud with all kinds of limits.
The main value of any particular limit on Identi.ca is to make sure users there are happy. A poll is one way to gauge how happy Identi.ca users are. It's been interesting to find out how passionate people are on different sides of the discussion.
It's almost impossible to enforce arbitrary limits like 140c in Open Source software; the first change I saw with StatusNet after it was launched was going up to 250c. I think the solution here is to EnlargeSpace and let a healthy ecosphere of sites develop.
Resolving Char Limit Mismatches
I wanted 160, but now that I'm trying out the 280 site, I have to admit I like it.
The only thing I wonder is how one StatusNet instance (with say 300 char limit) and another instance (with say 140 char limit) will resolve overlength notices. I've heard all sorts of Ajaxy expander schemes bandied about. However, I'd think that breaking a overlength notice into series of right-sized notices would probably be better.
This kind of solution would preserve the functionality of bridges to services like Twitter, too.
It would be nice if there
It would be nice if there were two settings: one to set a hard character limit, and another for the number of characters displayed before being hidden by an "expand" button.
160 characters?
Wasn't the original 160 char text message limit designed to be the perfect length for short communications. 140 chars took 20 off this ideal number.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/technology/2009/05/invented-text-messagi...
Yes, but those 20 characters
Yes, but those 20 characters "taken off" are reserved for the username (the article you linked says that too) — not a downside at all if you happen to use microblogging via SMS (like I do, thanks to Telstra's free SMS arrangement with Twitter).
Maybe, for english
140 or 160 chars might be the right limit for short communications in english but certainly it's not for spanish. I'm pretty sure there's lots of other languages to and the limit would be a bit larger.
I love the approach StatusNet people went with this, for me it's the right way to go; now it's time to solve the length issue in the federation.
language requirement
what's interesting about this post is that one of the more interesting things I hear about micro-blogging is that the 140 char limit is also more much flexible in other languages. Of course they were talking about languages like Chinese and Japanese with completely different character sets, but all the same this is the first time I've ever heard someone say that their language takes up /more/ space than English.
Most latin-based languages
Most latin-based languages take more space than English. It usually causes problems when localizing software; UI space made to fit English string, some button text translated to Spanish and it overflows because it's 50% longer...
Post new comment